On 26 Aug 98 at 21:12, Ingemar Uvhagen wrote:
> Good and interesting posting Shawn.
>
> So, the conclusion I make after reading Shawn's posting and his "20 year
> camera" term
> I would think the OM-1(N) and the OM-2(N) are the only ones that might last
> that
> long, and I think the OM-3(Ti) and the OM-4(Ti) would not. Not because they
> are not
> sturdy enough or something, but that they carry more electronics. As I see it
> a "20
> year camera" have to be very simple in its features, and it might then very
> well be a
> "30 year camera". I also think a camera without any electronic at all (without
> build-in meter) will last longest of all.
>
> Now, am I wrong about this or do you disagree that buying an OM-1(N) or an
> OM-2(N) is
> the only way to get a "20 year camera"?
>
If one could buy a new OM-1/2 today, I would agree. But since you can't, the
picture changes a little. You need to factor in things like the average age of
an OM-1/2 in good condition, then think about the next 20 years. I suspect in
10 years, it may be as difficult/costly to find certain OM-1 parts as it is now
to find an OM-2S circuit board. So I guess the OM-3T would qualify as a good
currently available substitute, if one could afford and find one. That way,
even if the electronics go south, you still have a titanium bodied, overpriced
OM-1...
So I guess there are several good choices: a new OM3T, a new OM-4T, a good used
OM3/4T, or a late model OM1N/2N. But I think even my OM-10 given a CLA would
probably go another 10 years easily, except the mirror slap is really getting
on my nerves...
But don't take any of this too seriously, I have far less experience than most
others on the list when it comes to OM bodies. (two OM-2s, an OM-10 and a 4T)
========================
Shawn Wright
Computer Systems Manager
Shawnigan Lake School
250-743-6240
swright@xxxxxxxxx
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|